FEATURE ARTICLES. WHEN YOU RELY ON HATE.

The Resignation of John Boehner as SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE, AND THE DIFFICULTY IN FINDING A WILLING AND "ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATIVE",

TELLS YOU ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THE STATE OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.

The, "I MAY BE REPUBLICAN, BUT AT LEAST I'M NOT AS CRAZY AS DONALD TRUMP" CAMPAIGN STRATEGY HAS SLOWED A LITTLE, BUT STILL PULLS IN DECENT NUMBERS AT THE POLLS.

A New Problem is that a Second Extremist Candidate, DR. BEN CARSON, appears to be pulling in similar numbers, further indicating that the REPUBLICAN PARTY CANNOT, OR WILL NOT, GET BEHIND A MODERATE CONSERVATIVE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE.  Instead, continuing to be led by the TEA PARTY EXTREMISTS, WHO WANT A GOVERNMENT THAT FAVORS THE POLICIES OF PREJUDICE, JUSTICE FOR A FEW, AND AN ECONOMY THAT CARES LITTLE FOR THE GREAT MAJORITY OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC.

To the TEA PARTY STRATEGISTS, THINGS THAT HAVE CREATED DURING 

THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION, LIKE...

-  UNIVERSAL HEALTH INSURANCE.

-  SAME- SEX MARRIAGE.

-  NUCLEAR TREATY WITH IRAN.

-  ENVIRONMENTAL SAFEGUARDS.

-  POLICIES THAT INCREASE WAGES,

   AND LOWER UNEMPLOYMENT.

...ARE UNACCEPTABLE.

WHY?  IS IT BECAUSE SOME OF THE ABOVE REPRESENT SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC ADVANCES FOR TRADITIONALLY WEAK MINORITY GROUPS, (POLITICALLY SPEAKING), WHO BY COMING TOGETHER WITH OTHER PROGRESSIVE GROUPS ARE EVENING UP THE ELECTORAL PLAYING FIELD?

MAYBE ITS THE REALIZATION THAT INEQUALITY AND INJUSTICE, AS TERMS THAT APPLY TO SELECT GROUPS, WHO CAN BE IGNORED BECAUSE NOT ENOUGH PEOPLE CARE,

                          IS NOW BECOMING A THING OF THE PAST.

LOGIC. THE FALLACY OF PROVING A NEGATIVE. PT 5.

Answering another example of THE FALLACY OF PROVING A NEGATIVE.

#2-  "So I GUESS THAT ALL THOSE PEOPLE SAW A MIRAGE, OR DON'T KNOW WHAT AN AIRPLANE LOOKS LIKE.  HOW DO YOU KNOW IT WASN'T A U.F.O FROM ANOTHER PLANET."

ANSWER-  "IN ORDER FOR SOMEONE TO DISPROVE THE EXISTENCE OF ANYTHING, THERE MUST BE SUFFICIENT REASON TO CONCLUDE THAT THE SUBJECT  MAY ACTUALLY BE A REALITY.  VALID CONCLUSIONS, BASED UPON PREMISES THAT CAN BE TESTED, EXAMINED, FALSIFIED, AND ARE BACKED UP BY QUALITY EVIDENCE, MUST BE PRESENT FOR THERE TO EVEN BE A REASON TO DEBATE ITS EXISTENCE. EXTRATERRESTRIAL VEHICLES FROM OTHER WORLDS DO NOT MEET ANY OF THE ABOVE CRITERIA."

-  "THEN WHAT DID THEY SEE? THEY ALL SAW THE SAME THING.  ARE YOU SAYING THE WITNESSES ARE JUST DELUDED, CRAZY, OR JUST PLAIN LIARS?"

ANSWER-  "I HAVE NEITHER SAID, NOR IMPLIED ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

JUDGING DISTANCES AND SHAPES CAN BE DIFFICULT, ESPECIALLY SINCE WEATHER AND ATMOSPHERIC CONDITIONS CAN DISTORT IMAGES.  ALSO, THE HUMAN MIND IS A COMPLEX MECHANISM.  PAREIDOLIA IS A PROCESS BY WHICH AN INDIVIDUAL TRIES TO MAKE ORDER, OR COMPREHEND RANDOM PIECES OF INFORMATION IT PERCEIVES AND MAKE SENSE OF THEM.  THIS CAN HAPPEN BY SIGHT OR SOUND.  THIS IS WHY SOME OF US SEE FACES IN CLOUDS, THE MAN IN THE MOON, OR GHOSTLY APPARITIONS."

"YOU ALSO HAVE TO REMEMBER, THAT AS A MEMBER OF A GROUP, THERE IS OFTEN A TENDENCY TO SEE WHAT YOU EXPECT THE GROUP WANTS YOU TO SEE.  IF A NUMBER OF PEOPLE TELL TO LOOK UP IN THE SKY TO SEE A FLYING SAUCER PASS BY, THERE IS OFTEN AN UNCONSCIOUS DESIRE TO FRAME WHAT YOU SEE IN TERMS OF WHAT YOU ARE TOLD BEFOREHAND.  THIS IS ESPECIALLY TRUE WHEN IT COMES TO RECALLING AN EVENT.  IF THE INFLUENCE AMONG FELLOW WITNESSES IS STRONG AND INSISTENT THAT YOU AGREE WITH THE OPINION OF THE MAJORITY, OR A STRONG AUTHORITY FIGURE, YOUR INITIAL IMPRESSIONS MAY BE PUSHED ASIDE FOR FEAR OF CONFLICT, AND A DESIRE TO BELONG."

"HOWEVER, PERHAPS THE GREATEST INFLUENCE IS CULTURAL BIAS..."

LOGIC. THE FALLACY OF PROVING A NEGATIVE. PT 4.

Here are a few Examples of Individuals and Groups using the FALLACY OF PROVING A NEGATIVE, AND HOW YOU MIGHT ANSWER THEM USING CRITICAL THINKING.

#1.WITNESS-  "I KNOW WHAT I SAW. YOU WEREN'T THERE. ARE YOU SAYING I AM A LIAR?"

ANSWER-  "NOT AT ALL. SINCE EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY IS BY DEFINITION SUBJECTIVE, THERE IS NO WAY TO KNOW WHAT YOU ACTUALLY OBSERVED.  THERE ARE TO MANY FACTORS THAT GO INTO THE WAY YOUR MIND PERCEIVES INCOMING INFORMATION FROM YOUR FIVE SENSES, AND HOW IT IS EVALUATED AND STORED INTO MEMORY."

THESE FACTORS INCLUDE;

-  PRECONCEIVED NOTIONS.

-  EMOTIONAL STATE OF MIND.

-  INFLUENCE FROM OTHERS SOURCES, WHICH 

CAN OCCUR AT THE TIME OF THE EVENT, OR IN 

THE FUTURE.

-  FINANCIAL AND/OR SOCIAL SELF- INTEREST, 

OR REWARDS VS NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES.

-  TIME OF DAY, WEATHER, DISTANCE AND DURATION

OF THE EVENT.

THIS IS WHY ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE CANNOT BE USED, 

BY ITSELF,  TO REACH A CONCLUSION ABOUT THE 

EXISTENCE OF ANY PHENOMENA.

LOOK FOR PART 5.

LOGIC. THE FALLACY OF PROVING A NEGATIVE. PT 3.

The FALLACY OF PROVING A NEGATIVE is an Invalid Form of Argumentation, that is Popular with Certain Types of PSEUDOSCIENCE AND ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE.

WHY?  The Conclusions being Claimed as Factual by These Subject Categories Require the Use of the SCIENTIFIC METHOD, and the Availability of PHYSICAL EVIDENCE AND DATA so that they can be properly evaluated.  THIS WILL INDICATE THE TYPE OF RESEARCH METHODS USED TO SUPPORT ANY CONCLUSIONS BEING MADE, AND WHETHER OR NOT THEY WILL STAND UP TO INTELLECTUAL SCRUTINY.

 

LOCH NESS, SCOTLAND.

Unfortunately, for Those who believe in the CLAIMS OF TRUTH Advocated by The Proponents of PSEUDOSCIENCE AND ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE, THEY SELDOM MEET SUCH CRITERIA.  THE FALLACY OF PROVING A NEGATIVE IS A WAY AROUND THESE PROBLEMS.

As I have Asserted in other Articles, SCIENCE, LOGIC, AND CRITICAL THINKING ARE NOT PROCESSES THAT YOU CAN USE PART OF THE TIME, OR EVEN MOST OF THE TIME.  THEY MUST BE USED, AND THEIR RULES AND GUIDELINES FOLLOWED EXACTLY, OR YOU CANNOT TRUST, PROVE, OR VALIDATE CONCLUSIONS BEING MADE IN ANY FIELD.

HOWEVER, Before I go any Further with Examples OF THIS FALLACY, the Following must be Understood, for it is Often a Sticking Point that Creates Confusion when Discussing The Fallacy of Proving A Negative.

CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING:

-  REQUIRING SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE THAT INDICATES THE EXISTENCE OF A PHENOMENA, THAT MEETS THE RULES AND STANDARDS OF LOGIC AND THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD, ONLY MEANS THAT A BURDEN OF PROOF MUST BE MET FOR IT TO BE ACKNOWLEDGED AS TRUE, PROBABLE, OR EVEN POSSIBLE BY THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY.  

-  THIS IS NOT A DENIAL THAT THE PHENOMENA CANNOT OR DOES NOT EXIST,  BUT A JUDGMENT THAT SAYS THERE HAS NOT BEEN ADEQUATE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT SUCH A CONCLUSION.

THAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FAITH AND FACT.